Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kira Takenouchi (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   delete. JForget 00:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Kira Takenouchi
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Nominating for deletion as an article about a non-notable writer. The article was previously deleted at AfD a year ago, and while it probably qualifies for speedy deletion as recreation of previously deleted material, I gave it some time to see if new editors could this time add reliable third-party sourcing to verify the claimed notability of this writer. Unfortunately, the situation remains unchanged since the previously deleted article, and all of the reference sources so far found are from fan blogs or the publisher's site, making this also a WP:BLP violation. It may also be of note that no article for this subject exists on Japanese Wikipedia. DAJF (talk) 01:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions.  —DAJF (talk) 01:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Anime and manga-related deletion discussions. --DAJF (talk) 01:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Publishers Weekly is not fan blog or her own company. That said, a single news article does not make notability. So it's to WP:CREATIVE that we need to look. A spot check of a three of her titles finds nothing in the way of reviews and, in fact, hardly any bookseller listings, which does not give one the warm fuzzies. (Nor does an ISBN format that indicates a very small press indeed, but notability does not come from the size of the publisher, but the notice it gets.) I need to finish checking the rest, but it's not looking like she's notable as an author. —Quasirandom (talk) 01:53, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I've not found coverage, let alone reliable third-party coverage, of any of the books with listed ISBNs. Having gotten strikes on all those, I'm not swinging at the others. Unless something turns up about the subject as a publisher, I say delete as not notable. —Quasirandom (talk) 04:22, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete just does not have any significant coverage and fails WP:CREATIVE. Agree with the BLP concerns that there is little referenceable information and as such, it should be redeleted. -- Collectonian  (talk · contribs) 02:00, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment A article saying that her enterprise is a commercial failure does not necessarily make her notable. I think it's fairly clear that she is not in the US, but I cannot judge about Japan. Am I correct there is no article on her in the Japanese WP? DGG (talk) 02:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't find anything to verify that she is actually Japanese or has published anything in Japanese. --DAJF (talk) 03:12, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Authors-related deletion discussions.  —Malkinann (talk) 02:54, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This bio doesn't produce enough evidences of notability both in quality & quantity. Ancient version of this article indicated that this person works were banned from Singapore, Malaysia, and Thailand. Asserting this fact with Reliable Sources could have justified a keep vote but that didn't happen. That convinced me this article is no more than an attempt to get more visibility & to catch attentions of potentials investors. --KrebMarkt 06:17, 4 August 2009 (UTC) Going further in my argumentation for delete, this article is the sole edited article by Katsumasahiro while the article creator  Kxings did is very best to insert an in-wiki link to Kira Takenouchi in Yaoi & Ai no Kusabi to the point of being disruptive. That reinforce my conviction of a botched attempt to put Kira Takenouchi on wikipedia map aiming for maximum visibility in Yaoi and yaoi related articles. --KrebMarkt 06:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't find the insertion of the links disruptive, but rather to be rooted in the belief that KT is a notable, prolific, GloBL author and that her fanfiction was relevant to the main article on Ai no Kusabi. After I removed the links from Ai no Kusabi, they did not return, and when I asked for a better source for the yaoi article, another was provided (sadly a Wikipedia mirror and unusable).  It's just a pity that there aren't enough sources to prove notability - I've checked aestheticism.com and come up with nothing. Katsumasahiro has said that Yaoi World will be a new magazine about yaoi, and that it will have an article on KT in its first issue, but the overall reliability of Yaoi World cannot be assessed at this time. --Malkinann (talk) 21:58, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your clarification. I think, she may be notable in the future but not now and not in that way with big unverified stuffs that were removed afterward. --KrebMarkt 06:07, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete yet again. This was deleted once before, is it so different now that it cannot be speedily deleted as a repost? JBsupreme (talk) 09:11, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I shot an email over to Erica Friedman to see if she may know of any other reliable sources for the article. Yaoi is Erica's area of expertise, so she may have something useful. --Farix (Talk) 11:43, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Err -- Friedman's expertise is in yuri, not yaoi. —Quasirandom (talk) 14:07, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You are correct on that. But Erica's response was that she knows nothing about this person and directed me to Sequential Tart or Yaoi Press. --Farix (Talk) 00:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No sign of notability or being anything other than a rather obscure writer. --Apoc2400 (talk) 21:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

--
 * Comment: The following passage is from the article's authors themselves. Users interested in reading more such wordings, including allegations of racism, fascism, and homophobia can go to the users' talkpages. Seb az86556 (talk) 13:16, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

Obscure? No offense, but you guys are idiots. Kira was just named "Best New Yaoi Author in the World" for 2009 by Yaoi World. You people are really out of touch. The same publication is featuring authors also hosted here on wikipedia but they are not the feature article, Kira is. Asking a COMPETITOR about KT hardly counts. Yuri is COMPLETELY different from yaoi. Yuri is girl on girl. If you don't know anything about Yaoi, keep off this page. Kxings (talk) 05:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings

ALSO, Yaoi World does have a teaser up. If you scroll down there is more information about the issue. The people featured in their lineup are real yaoi writers. If you don't know who they are, you have no business editing this page. Kxings (talk) 05:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings

You people are really funny. You think wikipedia is the gold standard or something? No one needs to be listed in wikipedia when there are a zillion other pedias out there to be listed in. So your insulting suggestion that we're trying to boost Kira's notability is ridiculous. She is ALL OVER THE WEB ALREADY. The only reason I even care is that you really ought to at least be half-way accurate about what you're including in wikipedia. You include Tina Anderson, but not Kira Takenouchi? Where does that come from? Do you even monitor any of the other yaoi writers listed on this site, or do you just come here? Having yaoi article without mentioning Kira Takenouchi is like celebrating candy without including chocolate. I honestly don't know why I'm wasting my time, except now I feel insulted, especially since NONE of you knows ANYTHING about yaoi and yet have the audacity to put this page up for deletion. You have your notability question answered by Yaoi World. You can't get much more notable than "Best New Yaoi Author in the World"!! Just because YOU have never read Yaoi or know what it's about doesn't mean it's not very popular and growing rapidly in the world now. If you actually read yaoi, you would know Kira. Why do you even care? Why this RUSH to remove her from wikipedia? Doing so will only launch this entry onto the web where it will be replicated a zillion times by the deletapedias out there. Kxings (talk) 05:32, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings

Book reviews: http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2317045.Taming_Riki_Vol_1_Part_1 http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/2807506.Taming_Riki_Volume_1_Part_2 You aren't going to find book reviews at Amazon because Yaoi House, her publisher, ONLY sells through its own website and thus has complete control over the price. Incidentally, Yaoi House is also being featured in Yaoi World as an entrepreneur for redefining what it means to be a publishing house in today's self-publishing/anti-Amazon world. Yaoi House publishes other authors besides Kira's books, so it is not a vanity press. The company stopped selling books temporarily when Kira Takenouchi, who was the President of the company, left the yaoi scene, but is now rebuilding their site/store. I make no apologies that I'm a huge fan of Kira Takenouchi. But it doesn't matter whether I'm a fan or not. You can no longer deny her notability simply because you are ignorant of yaoi. Kxings (talk) 06:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings

STRONG keep for all the reasons I've stated and the fact that the reference you all poo-pooed turned out to be correct. Also, with regard to the remark above about investors, Kira/Yaoi House are not taking any new investors. So your point is irrelevant. Kxings (talk) 07:20, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings
 * Striking, I have came to find out that this is an obvious block evasion account of . --Farix (Talk) 20:59, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

KEEP - If "Best New Yaoi Author in the World" doesn't count for notability, what the hell does? Who was the asshole that accused me of posting a "bogus" reference? You can't refute it now, these are all COMPETITORS of KT being interviewed by Yaoi World. And I quote from their website: "Yaoi World is a free review e-zine, a public service for those who appreciate yaoi/boy's love. We hope to become the definitive source for unbiased news relating to the world of yaoi and boy's love. Yaoi World is not affiliated with any company, organization, or individual. We will host a single banner from any yaoi-related site, free of charge.

Editor-in-Chief: Yutaka Takehiko Contact: admin@yaoiworld.net Issue 1: Rising Stars & Entrepreneurs

Featuring: Kira Takenouchi, "A Pioneer of American Yaoi" - Winner: Best New Yaoi Author in the World, Yaoi World 2009

Interviews with: - Tina Anderson "Keeping the Press Hot" - Tricia Owens of Juxtapose Fantasy "Making Boy's Love A Business" - Becca Abbott "Raising the Bar on Quality" - SL Publishing Group "Innovation and Cooperation" - Shuang Wen "The Art of Yaoi: China's Finest" - Van Duran "Spain's Little Gem" - Yaoi House "Redefining the Publishing House"

and others.

Release: October 10, 2009 Article submissions: We will consider article submissions related to yaoi, however, you may not submit an article which publicizes your own work or company. Interviews are selected by Yaoi World only and cannot be requested." Katsumasahiro (talk) 09:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Katsumasahiro

Kira Takenouchi is based in the USA, not Japan. Katsumasahiro (talk) 09:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Katsumasahiro

All her books can be seen here: http://openlibrary.org/a/OL3761269A/Kira-Takenouchi You say you are waiting for the publisher to show up or someone to provide more information, and yet conveniently you DELETED Yaoi House a year go from wikipedia. Katsumasahiro (talk) 09:57, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Katsumasahiro


 * What is Yaoi World actually? Does it have any reputation? --Apoc2400 (talk) 10:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I've not been able to locate any google hits for the name of the editor in chief, which doesn't exactly fill me with confidence. --Malkinann (talk) 11:09, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment I believe we need to have a checkuser done for and . Both accounts where created at about the same time, both edit the same group of articles, both add the same content, and both edit at approximately the same time. This raises the suspicion of sock puppetry. --Farix (Talk) 12:30, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I would have said that all of the above similarities could easily be a coincidence, but it's interesting how they both sign their names using exactly the same non-standard style. Coincidence? Hmmm... --DAJF (talk) 12:46, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I think not. There are just too many coincidences to be coincidental. That is usually the tell-tell sign of a sockpuppet. But a checkuser will confirm such suspicions. --Farix (Talk) 12:51, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Sockpuppet, that crossed my mind too. I won't mind if someone drop a line or two at Sockpuppet investigations. --KrebMarkt 13:14, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Good call. Possibly a positive. Seb az86556 (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete I'll have to go with delete as there is insufficient coverage by published third-party sources with a history and reputation of reliability. Unpublished sources, yet to be published sources, sources that are not independent of the subject, or sources that has not yet established a history or reputation for reliability do not demonstrate that the subject is notable. --Farix (Talk) 12:48, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete: Out of a pure "gut feeling:" someone who throws unreferenced material at us, starts arguing, then pulls up a website that's "under construction," calls several others users 'idiots' and 'homophobes,' then brings up the next website with flying logos and a lot of bling -- also "under construction" -- and then rants away at this deletion-nomination in the same tone, clearly does not have a concept of what "reliable sources" are. Anyone who is certain about verifiability simply would not need to throw a tantrum like that, but rather just go to the bookshelf and direct us to the relevant page. Seb az86556 (talk) 13:23, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I can't believe any of you people. Your suggestion that I, as fan, would go to the time and expense of creating a new organization, new website, interview a zillion people just to "make" my reference at Wikipedia legitimate simply blows my mind. Are you for real? Do you have a real life outside of editing here at Wikipedia? And I got a message I was accused of sockpuppetry? You people are fucking assholes. You were proved wrong and this is how you respond--oh, the two people who actually know something about yaoi MUST be the same person. That's so insulting I ought to sue Wikipedia for slander. Did you ever think of that? As for this entry, I completely give up. You'll find out soon enough that you're wrong. BTW, I got the balls to email Kira on this and here's her reply, a lot of thanks I just got from her as well for all my trouble.

wikipedia entry Inbox		X Reply to all Forward Reply by chat Filter messages like this Print Add to Contacts list Delete this message Report phishing Report not phishing Show original Show in fixed width font Show in variable width font Message text garbled? Why is this spam/nonspam?

show details 10:15 AM (0 minutes ago) Reply Follow up message from	Kira Takenouchi  to	katsumasahiro@gmail.com date	Wed, Aug 5, 2009 at 10:15 AM subject	wikipedia entry mailed-by	gmail.com hide details 10:15 AM (0 minutes ago) Reply Follow up message Katsu,

Wikipedia is one of many sites on the Net over which I have almost no control. I simply do not have the time to monitor every site that posts information about me. I appreciate the effort you seem to have put into updating the article posted about me, but surely you must have better things to do with your time. Whether or not I am in Wikipedia makes little difference to me; my deletion from it will have no effect on my existence. It is Wikipedia, not Existipedia.

I am thankful that Wikipedia was diligent about protecting certain aspects of my privacy. Reliability and verifiability of information are not merely "good ideas," they are absolutely essential in this age of litigation. Do as you will with this statement; however, I have no interest in hearing about Wikipedia again.

Kind regards,

Kira Takenouchi Reply Forward Katsumasahiro (talk) 14:26, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Katsumasahiro

Assuming good faith is a fundamental principle on Wikipedia. Most people try to help the project, not hurt it. If this were false, a project like Wikipedia would be doomed from the beginning.

Katsumasahiro (talk) 14:40, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Katsumasahiro

STRONG KEEP. This appears to be a Catch-22. You cite notability issues; fair enough, a good reference is provided. (If you have doubts about its authenticity, why not contact the other individuals being interviewed for the Yaoi World issue? Surely you are not suggesting that Katsu has fabricated all those different companies, sites, artists, and authors, including Tina Anderson who is listed here on wikipedia, simply to create the illusion of a real e-zine? I find it hard to believe this is the view you are standing behind. So, down goes the reference, and then we are a back to notability issues, which makes it easy for you to delete the entry. This is not really about Kira Takenouchi or wikipedia, is it? This is about people having their feathers ruffled. For my part, I apologize if I was rude, but remember, BL-fans are not "regular" wikipedia editors. We don't know all the rules of editing here. We only come here to check out the articles of interest to us, which is yaoi and its hottest writers. You've given me a good idea, though. I'm going to create Yaoipedia, or suggest someone create it, so that we really can have a reliable source of information on current Yaoi authors, artists, and titles. With authors like Kira it's extremely difficult to find her titles because she refuses to publish through "typical" distribution. So finding pages like http://openlibrary.org/a/OL3761269A/Kira-Takenouchi was a godsend since it listed the ISBNs too. People need those to find the books at bookswap places. Kira's books are very pricey and most of us can't afford them, have to find them second-hand. At least wikipedia had the ISBNs listed to help the users out. I'm fairly confident if this page goes down it will just go back up again. But I'm curious as to why some of you feel the need to vandalize her page down to a stump, if you're going to delete in anyway. You won't even give us that small bit of courtesy, after all the editing we've done, to at least leave the article intact? Why? Kxings (talk) 16:02, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings
 * !Vote struck for double !voting. --Farix (Talk) 16:05, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

That's your only response? Seriously? This isn't a "competition". You don't "win" anything by deleting KT's entry. The only thing you do is dilute the quality of Wikipedia as an accurate database of information. Kxings (talk) 16:12, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings
 * Yaoi World has not had a single publication at this time and its website contains no articles. In fact, all the website has to say is that it is currently under construction. So attempts to use Yaoi World as a source fails both of the policies on biographies of living people (BLP) and verifiability and cannot be used in an article. Only after Yaoi World has made its publication and establish its repudiation as a reliable source can it be used to source in a BLP, but not before. Removing unsourced or poorly sourced content from a BLP is not vandalism, but following Wikipedia's policies for BLP. It is vandalism to add such information back into the BLP. If you look at the Tina Anderson article, you will see that she has been covered by an academic paper and an interview with Anime News Network. While I have not checked the extent of her coverage by the academic paper, the ANN interview is fairly detailed. Even with that, Anderson is just barely scrapping the edge of notability. This is far more then what Kira Takenouchi currently has. Even the Publisher's Weekly source is just a blog entry that is commenting on another blog entry. That is rather dubious as a source itself. --Farix (Talk) 16:24, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom and Farix. There is no coverage nor any reliable sources for this.  freshacconci  talk talk  16:27, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

You're just being pigheaded. You know that the yaoi writers, artists and companies being interviewed by Yaoi World are real. At least one is, by WIKIPEDIA'S OWN STANDARDS, acknowledged as being notable. Yaoi World, by interviewing notable individuals and companies, inherits notability. By deleting this entry you prevent additional references from being added as Yaoi World is established and subsequence issues are released, because deleting the entry will block the Kira Takenouchi page from Wikipedia from an entire year. You know this. You're banking on it. This has ceased to become something I care about from the standpoint of a fan wanting to see his favorite author listed. It has now become the principle of the thing, the way you are attempting to censor information. Kxings (talk) 16:44, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxings

Are you seriously accusing Katsu of fabricating Yaoi World, as well as all those writers, companies, and artists just to create a reference? First of all, it's impossible, he couldn't have done it. '''Visit the sites that are listed as having made the Rising Stars & Entrepreneurs list. They are established sites that are independent of KT, in fact, they are competitors.''' Tina Anderson has been listed here on Wikipedia for years. Juxtapose Fantasy has been around for maybe 10 years. Becca Abbott, too. Are you really suggesting that Katsu made some elaborate plan beginning over a decade ago to create fake yaoi writers and companies, which includes writing hundreds of stories on all these different sites, learning how to draw amazing yaoi art, all for the purpose of one day editing a silly wikipedia entry so as to have a reliable source showing notability for Kira Takenouchi? Think about it and you will realize how absurd that position is. If you delete this entry as "not notable", you must also delete Tina Anderson, since she is here on wikipedia and is one of the authors being interviewed by Yaoi World. (I'm not actually suggesting you do that, I like Tina Anderson. I'm being facetious, just trying to make a point.) Kxings (talk) 16:37, 5 August 2009 (UTC)Kxing


 * I don't believe that Yaoi World is a trustworthy, reliable source of information, as the editor-in-chief has either used a nom de plume or has never written on the Internet before. I am, however, very open to being proved wrong on this point (per the guidelines at WP:RS) - it would certainly make improving the yaoi article easier if so! Please note that a reference being notable as the subject of an article and being reliable, acceptable as a source, are two different things.  As Wikipedia can be written by anybody, Wikipedia's chief safeguard has been a reliance on verifiable, reliable sources, the more, the merrier. It's just unfortunate that the majority of the sources that have been provided have either been to Takenouchi's own site or to unproven zines. --Malkinann (talk) 17:00, 5 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note It's been confirmed that the article's creator was indefinitely blocked a year ago under the account  for repeatedly recreating this and other related articles. I'll leave it to others if this now qualifies for CSD G5. --Farix (Talk) 22:17, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
 * delete Does not appear to meet WP:BIO or WP:CREATIVE. Material by individual does not apparently meet WP:BOOKS either. The claim made by the repeated commentator that a publication inherits notability by having an occasional interview with a notable individual is simply wrong. We do not have multiple, independent reliable sources for this individual. We do not have other reasons to consider the individual notable. Note to the repeated commentator: No one is claiming that you personally have constructed these other websites: the point is that regardless of who made them, they are functionally equivalent to personal websites: they lack either reliablity or notability in their material and opinions. If this individual does become notable or if these websites become more reliable or their awards become notable then we can reconsider. Until that occurs, we don't have much choice here. JoshuaZ (talk) 22:36, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

"No one is claiming that you personally have constructed these other websites: the point is that regardless of who made them, they are functionally equivalent to personal websites: they lack either reliablity or notability in their material and opinions." You don't consider Yaoi Press to be notable? You don't consider Tina Anderson to be notable? Why then are they listed on Wikipedia? You mentioned Yaoi Press as a potential yaoi expert, earlier. You've changed your view, apparently. Katsumasahiro2 (talk) 00:02, 7 August 2009 (UTC)--katsumasahiro2
 * I've already been over Anderson so I won't repeat myself. But looking at the Yaoi Press article, I see at least two non-trivial sources that cover the subject by a reliable source. That's generally enough for most people to pass either WP:NOTE or WP:CORP. The article is in poor shape, but that's likely because no one really took the existing sources and developed the article. --Farix (Talk) 00:41, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure that Yaoi Press talk about Takenouchi at all on their website... --Malkinann (talk) 02:13, 7 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete this spam. The account that recreated the article is a sock of the account that originally created it previously. It should have been speedied as spam recreated by an indefinitely blocked user. Even taking all that out of consideration, the subject does not satisfy notability. Multiple, independent, reliable sources are necessary and they're lacking here. &lt;&gt;Multi-Xfer&lt;&gt; (talk) 02:20, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is not a single claim to notability on the entire article. The text simply states that the subject is a writer and president of a U.S.-based publishing house, but neither of these qualifies this person for notability. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrathel (talk • contribs) 08:52, August 7, 2009
 * Delete Notability is not asserted, let alone shown. The sources are self-published, blogs, or in the case of the ezine, unpublished.  Considering the sockpuppetry and personal attacks involved, recommend Salt as well. Edward321 (talk) 14:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Non Notable, this also appears to be a deleted article, OP got upset and remade it issue. I am going with delete per above as well.Knowledgekid87 (talk) 17:50, 7 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete There is not enough information in secondary sources to write an article on her, regardless of any other issues. Steve Dufour (talk) 00:46, 8 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.